I think it has more to do with every type of boxer you see just making the game his. Punching is punching, footwork is footwork. Very rarely do you see some "new" technique in boxing. Every boxer takes from the same pool of skill set and physical abilities, and developed his/her style to his own strengths. If your fast and powerful, your style of boxing will form to that, if you're slow but good at defense and can counter, you're style will be completely different from the fast/powerful guy.
When it comes to coaches, where the "lineage" would come into play, those guys are picking pupils that show promise. Usually a trainer is good at training a specific type of fighter too, one of the reasons you see situations like Khan leaving Roach. Once that trainer refines the fighter and starts putting him/her into competitions, it's about proving the fighter's worth rather than his style of boxing. Your style is yours, you just try to use it to win. There's really no room for the lineage scenario. How funny would it be to see a boxing gym advert: "Philly Shell Slick" or "Peek-a-Boo Bangers" or "One Trick Pony?"
I can't speak for Muay Thai, but I get the feeling it's the same sort of thing.
Yep, the proof is in the pudding.
FMA has too much political and too-deadly bullshit in it. Ditto for some Kung Fu, and a bunch of other non-competitive martial arts. Japanese Jujutsu used to have this problem too. Then along came Kano, who promoted sportive competitions. Now we have Judo, and lots of competition.
Want to know which Judo clubs are the best? Check who's got the most competitors in the Olympics, or national, or regional championships.
Until more FMA clubs adopt a more sportive quality-check system, it is easy to argue that your club has the most deadliest. If you don't spar or compete, how can this ever be verified or debunked? It can't.
Thankfully, there are groups like the Dog Brothers who's events are a refreshing reality check for what actually works. It's tough to argue that one fighter or system is better than another if he's submitted, knocked out, or unable to continue a fight. Right now for FMA, I'd say that the gatherings are the best prooving grounds that FMA have.
Sometimes in boxing you hear commentators say a boxer is a "typical European fighter" or a "typical Mexican fighter." There are stereotypes and some cultural differences, but ideally a fighter should adopt a personal style that suits his strengths, predilections, and build. Otherwise you can have a fucking disaster on your hands.
One of the (numerous) problems with lineage-crazy arts like Wing Chun is that proponents of the style think their discipline teaches an all-encompassing strategy that works for everyone in every situation. They say things like "a Wing Chun fighter is never aggressive, he must always sit back and counter-punch." So not only are they limited by dead training and low-percentage techniques, but also the ways they can employ their minuscule-at-best repertoire of skills (To be fair, most just drop any semblance of style as soon as the adrenaline kicks in).
Last edited by Holy Moment; 4/08/2014 3:58pm at .
I always forget just how great Iron Mike was.
Mostly because the first fight I watched was the Buster Douglas fight.
Of course this is my real memories of Tyson
"He's fighting like his father, but isn't built like his father."
Some arts are so old they've been through their "lineage wars" phase and moved on.
Hung ga did that. It was relatively quiet for a few hundreds years until around 2000 when all the masters went online and began nitpicking on each other, leading to very public feuds...relatively short lived ones, though.
We fight, kiss, and make up. Why? Because Hung ga has been a family thing for maybe at least a dozen generations and there is a lot of love in the community, differences aside, even between "parallel" lineages like Sam and Fong. Those lineages in turn don't look down on the "village" styles that are part of their ancestry.
Unlike in the Chun World, where the opposite happened, the lineage exploded from one focal point into a splintering of lineages, which now all argue (again using the internet) incessantly on who is correct.
In Hung ga, we don't talk about "who is correct". We decide who is correct on the lei tai. It's been a useful metric for more than a millennia, and there are fewer fatalities than ever!
Last edited by W. Rabbit; 4/09/2014 12:29pm at .
One thing just occurred to me: to some extent, a difference may be in the implications of ranking. TMA generally infer teaching qualifications via rank (ie BJJ blue belt can assist in instruction, a purple can lead, etc.). Getting ranked by a coach of uncertain lineage affects one's own ability to coach and confer "legitimate" rank. By comparison, a boxer can be a long standing champion without any presumption of holding any coaching ability whatsoever, and conversely, a great coach may have a crappy fight record. Ultimately, as stated above, the consumer generally only cares what a purely competitive art's coach's students are accomplishing, and not who coached the coach.
"Your body must be like a stone, your mind... like a meatloaf."
Originally Posted by strikistanian
Originally Posted by Devil
Originally Posted by ermghoti
Well grading is almost defined by lineage or it doesn't make sense.
Great post! I hadn't thought about the stereotypes as it would be applied to the OP topic. There are definitely "typical ways of fighting" based on ethnicity/region.
Originally Posted by Holy Moment
You often hear about certain disadvantages one fighter will have against another due to the style differences. Southpaw vs. Orthodox, Power Puncher vs. Counter Puncher, and Mayweather vs. Everyone Else. Styles are based on the strengths of the individual fighter instead of the "lineage" of the fighter, and each style opens itself up to have weaknesses. I tend to look at lineage feuds as a dick measuring contest that is irrelevant. It always comes down to the individual fighter and how much training/experience they have in boxing.
In regards to Marvis Frazier, that's probably the closest thing you'll get to a lineage war in boxing. He was apparently a very talented pure boxer, but apparently either his coach or his father Joe wanted him to be a swarmer (Like Joe). The problem was that Joe Frazier's swarming, in-fighting style was tailored to his stocky build, high degree of conditioning, and power. Marvis was taller and leaner than his father, it didn't make sense for him to always try to pressure in and fight inside.
Early in his career, Muhammad Ali tried training with Archie Moore but didn't want to adopt his coach's boxer-puncher style. He needed to fight in a way that best utilized his superhuman speed. Some guys just get caught up using a style that just doesn't work for them, whether it be because of lineage or personal stubbornness (Think Jorge Gurgel, Andy Wang, etc. You gays remember Andy Wang?).
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO